Did you ever hear the one about Jesus being Mexican? Well, he was bilingual; he was constantly harassed by the government; and his first name was Jesus.

Or, perhaps Jesus was Irish? He loved a good story; he never kept a steady job; and his last request was for a drink.

Or maybe it’s possible that Jesus was Californian? He never cut his hair; he was always walking around barefoot; and he started a new religion.

You may not have heard these Jesus jokes, but you’ve heard others. They represent a comedic trend that has animated the United States since the 1970s. More and more comedy gimmicks hit on Jesus, his ethnicity and his relationship to politics. Laughing with (and at) the Lord is now fodder for major motion pictures, barroom comedy tours, graphic novels, t-shirts and bumper stickers.

How is it that a figure sacred to so many Americans has become the punch line of so many jokes? And why is it acceptable to poke fun at Jesus when other sacred figures are deemed off limits or there is hell to pay for mocking them?

The explanations are as numerous as the laughs.

Immigration shifts from the 1960s changed the ethnic and religious faces of the country so no tradition dominates today. The Christian right made such a moral spectacle of itself that it practically begged to be mocked. The emergence of “spiritual, but not religious” sensibilities left many Americans willing to denounce or laugh about traditional faith. The public rise of agnosticism, atheism, and secularism led to aggressive mockery as a form of persuasion.

If we pause to consider why we’re laughing, we find that the comic bits delve into some of our thorniest and unresolved problems. The jokes reveal much more about us than they do Jesus. They speak to how our society has changed, how it hasn’t, and what we’re obsessed with.

The first public jokes about Jesus were heard in the 1970s. There had been religious jokes before this, but none about Jesus had become widely popular because organized Christianity held such authority. As the economic recession and problems of urban decay collided with civil rights exhaustion and new immigration, however, some Jesus jokes emerged.

Archie Bunker on “All in the Family” was the white racist and misogynist you loved to hate and hated to love. On one occasion, his son-in-law challenged Bunker’s rampant anti-Semitism with the claim, "Jesus was Jewish." Archie shot back immediately: "Only on his mother's side."

The “All in the Family” spin off “Good Times” featured a black family that lives in an inner-city housing project, probably Chicago's infamous Cabrini Green. On the show's second episode, the oldest son J. J. astounded everyone by painting Jesus as black. The younger son loves it, and says he learned all about Christ’s blackness from the local Nation of Islam.

As the family debates whether this black Jesus should be hung on the wall in place of their white Jesus, they “miraculously” receive $140 from the Internal Revenue Service. Feeling blessed, the family placed the painting on its living room wall, and the elated J. J. shouted his tagline, "Dyno-mite!”

From the 1980s to the present, the number of prominent Jesus jokes has multiplied like loaves and fishes:

• In “Talladega Nights,” Ricky Bobby and his family debated which Jesus to pray to (“baby Jesus in golden fleece diapers,” “grown-up Jesus,” “ninja Jesus”). Their overall hope is that Jesus will help them continue their extravagant lifestyle.

• “South Park” featured Jesus as a weak-kneed host of a local talk show who boxes the devil.

• “The Colbert Report” placed a gun in Christ’s hand and had him defend conservatives against the liberal “War on Easter.”

• “Saturday Night Live” let Jesus chastise Tim Tebow for using the Lord’s name in vain and ended the bit by declaring that the Mormons have it right.

One unforgettable scene in the rather forgettable recent film “21 Jump Street” may explain why Jesus has become such a joke.

Before Jonah Hill’s character returns to high school as an undercover cop, he prays to a small, crucified “Korean Jesus.” Down on his knees, he says: “Hey Korean Jesus, I don’t know if you only cater to Korean Christians or if you even exist, no offense. I’m just really freaked out about going back to high school. It was just so f***ing hard the first time. … I just really don’t want to f*** this up. Sorry for swearing so much. The end? I don’t really know how to end the prayer.”

The hilarity of the moment only makes sense in our time. Hill's character is unchurched and agnostic, but wants spiritual power to guide him. We can laugh at how agnosticism and being “spiritual, but not religious,” leave him uncertain of what to say, how to say it, and even how to end.

We can also laugh at how ethnic factors color his approach. By wondering if Korean Jesus cares only about Korean problems, Hill pokes fun at the issue which was made a media spectacle in 2008, when the Rev. Jeremiah Wright could be heard preaching that “Jesus was a poor black man” as part of his support for Barack Obama. What good is a God who only cares for those who look like him?

The Jesus jokes not only reveal how tangled our religious, racial, economic and political positions have become, but also how many outlets there are for the jokes. In these tense times, when presidential hopefuls point fingers at one another and families unfriend one another over political and cultural differences, laughing may be one way to talk about the problems without killing one another.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Edward J. Blum and Paul Harvey.

soundoff(5,750 Responses)

Jon

God orders women and children be taken as slaves.

DT 20:13-14 "When the Lord delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the males .... As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves."

November 11, 2012 at 6:48 pm |

onecell

god is a swell guy

November 11, 2012 at 6:49 pm |

dave

I will become an atheists they have it so easy - "I am right and you must prove me wrong." I hope I am able to be obnoxious enough to be an atheist

November 11, 2012 at 6:46 pm |

Answer

Huge fail.

November 11, 2012 at 6:48 pm |

Observer

Of course, it's not obnoxious for Christians to tell people that don't do exactly as they are told, that they deserve to spend eternity in hell. Get real.

November 11, 2012 at 6:49 pm |

sybaris

Dave THIS is obnoxious:

Bibles in every motel room
God on our money
Prayer before public events
Christian cable networks 24/7
Discounts on insurance for being christian
Churches every 6 blocks in every city over 100,000
Christian bookstores in every town over 12,000
God in the Pledge of Allegiance
Televangelists 24/7
Christian billboards along the highway advertising Vacation Bible School and “repent or go to He.ll”
Federally recognized Christian holiday
Radioevangelists 24/7
Religious organizations are tax free
75% of the population claims to be Christian
National day of prayer
God in the National Anthem
Weekday Christian Education for elementary students

November 11, 2012 at 6:51 pm |

pima

Exactly what does "I will become an atheists they have it so easy . ." mean?

November 11, 2012 at 6:59 pm |

Chozo

Ok Dave, try it this way: "Prove what you say about religion is true."

There is no arrogance there, and no put-downs in that question.
Just a simple question that you may not be able to give a real, concrete (not based on 'belief'), answer for.
You don't have to prove the athiest wrong, just prove yourself right if you want to convince him.

If you disagree with him, then you don't have to reply at all, but don't expect him to accept your word as fact.

November 11, 2012 at 7:02 pm |

Answer

@Chozo

"just prove yourself right if you want to convince him."

I've seen this played a lot by you freaks. Why don't you prove your statements?
I know the game better than you.. so let's start with you. You obviously want an atheist to have doubts so you can feel that being religious is superior. I already know how weak your kind are.. always playing the same doubt games. So let's see you start playing. XD

November 11, 2012 at 7:09 pm |

ThinkDefyUnite

You have it backwards. Extraordinary claims (yours) require extraordinary proofs. I feel sorry for you and your ambiguous "god".

November 11, 2012 at 7:13 pm |

Blessed are the Cheesemakers

Dave,

You are the one making the claim, we just say you have not made your case. In a court of law God would be "not guilty" of existing.

November 11, 2012 at 7:19 pm |

HeavenSense

"Jesus is coming...
...get a towel"

November 11, 2012 at 6:45 pm |

Towelie

If you are giving the Messiah a happy ending, don't forget to bring a towel!

November 11, 2012 at 6:46 pm |

Jon

Exodus 22:15 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

Exodus 22:24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.

November 11, 2012 at 6:44 pm |

Reality

origin: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482 NY Times review and important enough to reiterate.

New Torah For Modern Minds

“Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. (prob•a•bly
Adverb: Almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell).

The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

Such startling propositions - the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years - have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity - until now.

The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine doc-ument.

The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim." But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark airing of it." Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees "that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at all." The rabbi offered what he called a "LITANY OF DISILLUSION”' about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes of Israel - not one shard of pottery."

November 11, 2012 at 6:46 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

The 'overall sub-culture' of this teenage skin mutilation seems to concern many folks. It concerns many folks who have to order their Subway sandwich from a monster with two giant holes where his earlobes used to be, like rubber bands stretched out so far you could stick a tree log in them. I too am concerned whenever the girl at the movie box office has so many lip and tongue piercings I can’t understand her when she tells me, “ith on the eft, two thores down”. These kids even shave their pubes and tattoo their mound.

Love Let Us,
Love Lettuce,
G.O.D.

November 11, 2012 at 6:43 pm |

Jon

Exodus 15:3 "The Lord is a man of war."

November 11, 2012 at 6:43 pm |

Stan

Yep. He'd sure be a horrid jerk if he existed.

November 11, 2012 at 8:12 pm |

Colin

The mythology of the "Empty Tomb" is not even consistent between the 4 gospels.

Who went to the tomb?

Mark (written about 35 years after Jesus died) – 3 women – Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome.
Matthew (written about 50 years after Jesus died) – 2 women – Mary Magdalene and “the other Mary.”
Luke (written about 50 years after Jesus died) – at least 5 women – Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Joanna and other, unnamed women. At least five women.
John (written about 60 years after Jesus died) – Only 1 woman – Mary Magdalene.

What did they find there?

Mark (written about 35 years after Jesus died) – the stone has been rolled back from the entrance to the tomb. There is no mention of any guards. A young man in a long, white robe is inside. His identi.ty is not revealed. He tells the two Marys and Salome to go tell the disciples that Jesus has risen and has gone to Galilee, where Jesus will appear to them.

Matthew (written about 50 years after Jesus died) – the stone has NOT been rolled back from the tomb. There is a great earthquake and an angel from heaven appears, rolls back the stone, sits on it and stares at them a face like lightning. There are guards posted, who freeze with fear. The angel takes the two women and shows them that the tomb is empty and tells them Jesus has risen and will meet the disciples in Galilee.

Luke (written about 50 years after Jesus died) – the stone IS rolled back. No earthquake, no angels, no young man in robe, no guards. Instead, two men are there in shining garments. They tell the group of (at least five) women that Jesus has risen as he foretold. No direction is given for the disciples to go to Galilee.

John (written about 60 years after Jesus died) – the stone IS rolled back. Mary Magdalene, who is alone, simply finds an empty tomb and flees. No angels, earthquakes, men in shining uniforms or guards are mentioned. She gets Peter and one other, unnamed disciple and they return. They find Jesus’ robes discarded on the floor, but the garment from his head neatly folded. Peter and the other disciple leave, but Mary Magdalene stays, weeping. She looks back in to the tomb and sees two angels and Jesus appears. She thinks he is the gardener until he reveals himself. He gives no direction about Galilee but simply tells her to tell the others he is ascending to the Father.

What happens next?

Mark (written about 35 years after Jesus died) – Nothing. The original Gospel according to Mark ends with the women leaving the tomb frightened and saying nothing to anybody about what they saw.

However, in the forged last 12 verses that were added to the end of the Gospel according to Mark a couple of hundred years later, Christ appears first to Mary Magdalene “out of whom he had cast seven demons.” She tells the others who do not believe her, but Jesus then appears to two (unnamed) disciples as they are walking in the countryside. They tell the others, who still don’t believe, but Jesus later appears to all 11 apostles (Judas is persona non grata at this point and/or dead) and rebukes them for not believing Mary Magdalene and the first two apostles who saw him earlier.

He then famously tells them to go out and preach the gospel to every creature and that he who believes and is baptized will be saved and he who does not will be condemned. Those who believe will speak in tongues and be unaffected by poisons and will be able to handle snakes and heal the sick by the mere laying of their hands.

This forged passage above is, by the way, where the evangelical tradition of “speaking in tongues,” the Appalachian tradition of snake handling and the Christian Science tradition of healing through “laying of hands” all come from – and it’s a complete forgery. Oh, the irony is rich!

Having told them this, Jesus zaps up to heaven and sits at the right hand of God.

Matthew (written about 50 years after Jesus died) – The two women meet Jesus and worship at his feet. He tells them to tell his disciples to meet him in Galilee. Meanwhile, the guards relate their story to the elders and the chief priests who bribe them to lie and say that the disciples took Jesus’ body away. Eventually the 11 apostles see Jesus in Galilee, some still doubting. Jesus tells them to go out and baptize people of all nations and that he will always be with them.

Luke (written about 50 years after Jesus died) – Peter runs to the tomb and finds it empty with Jesus’ clothes discarded. Jesus does not appear to him, but does to two disciples who are walking in the countryside. They do not recognize him and he feigns ignorance as they recount the story of his death and of women encountering angels in the tomb. Jesus walks with them some more, rebuking them and then spends the night with them, breaking bread at which point they realize who he is and he vanishes.

They tell the 11 apostles what happens and then Jesus appears to them. He explains the scriptures to them and that it was necessary that he die and be resurrected. He then leads them to Bethany and is carried up to heaven.

John (written about 60 years after Jesus died) – This is the longest post mortem account of the four. Mary Magdalene recounts her story to the apostles. He appears to them that night when they are assembled, hiding from the Jews. He shows his wounds to them. Thomas was not there and when they tell him, there is the famous “doubting Thomas” scene. This scene does not appear in any other gospel.

Jesus later appears to some apostles while they are fishing. They do not recognize him at first. They catch nothing, but Jesus tells them throw the nets out of the other side of the boat and they catch many fish. Then they know it is Jesus. Jesus eats a breakfast of fish with them and has a strange conversation with Peter. The Gospel ends with the comment that Jesus did many other things that the author did not mention as doing so would be too great a task. No mention is made of Jesus’ ultimate departure.

November 11, 2012 at 6:42 pm |

Chad

Funny that there isnt a single contradiction in your entire post 🙂

Some guidelines to help you understand what is, and what is not contradictory:

These two statements are contradictory:
– Fred and Mary went to the store
– Mary went to the store but Fred did not

These two statements are NOT contradictory:
– Fred and Mary went to the store
– Fred, Jane and Mary went to the store

That the accounts are not in agreement, Chard, is evidence they aren't based on fact.

November 11, 2012 at 7:03 pm |

Chad

hmm.. you seem not have understood..

They do not disagree and the do not contradict each other
They each contain information unique to an account, which one would expect from a different witness of the event.

November 11, 2012 at 7:07 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

I'm sure you wish that were true.

November 11, 2012 at 7:11 pm |

My goodness but your stupid

Chad ‘Funny that there isnt a single contradiction in your entire post ’

Jesus had 34 mistresses and 67 illegitimate children. According to your “logic” this does not contradict the bible

November 11, 2012 at 8:35 pm |

Jon

Psalms 137:9 "Blessed is he who takes your babies and smashed them against rocks"

Who cares what the Bible says, it's a barbaric book for primitive people.

November 11, 2012 at 6:41 pm |

Reality

In case you missed this on p. 24:

Now, now, now, let us be fair as we bring equal time to Mohammed at the risk of having CNN's headquarters blown up:

"Yo Mohammed so stupid, I told him to makeup his mind and he put lipstick on his forehead.

Yo Mohammed so cross-eyed he threw a bolt of lightning at the Earth and missed.

Yo Mohammed so poor he eats cereal with a fork to save milk.

Yo Mohammed so ugly cartoonists are afraid to draw him."

A terrorist blows himself up and goes up to Heaven where he sees St. Peter at the Pearly Gates and says, “Are you Mohammed?”

St. Peter says. “No, he’s further up.”

He walks up further and sees Jesus. “Are you Mohammed?”

Jesus says, “No, he’s further up…”

Walks on further and sees God with a big beard. “You must be Mohammed!”

“No,” says God, “I’m God, take a seat. Would you like tea?”

The terrorist sits down and says, “Yes, please, I’d love some tea.”

God calls out loudly “Mohammed! Two teas now and make it quick!”

November 11, 2012 at 6:40 pm |

webba

I think Jesus has a healthy sense of humor and would laugh at a lot of these jokes.

November 11, 2012 at 6:36 pm |

MagicPanties

golem 4:52
Thus begat the invisible unicorn and whomsoever doth seeth it, then so too shall they be pink. And Jesus wept.

November 11, 2012 at 6:35 pm |

bob mc

This is extremely tacky, like CNN has nothing better to do. I would fire this writer, ecspecially when one considers most of the "Jesus" are written by Jews.... They seem to own everything, and wishes to poop on anyone in their way less their family. No Class CNN, No Class at All (ah) ..... I pity this writer he is a complete piece of defecation,

November 11, 2012 at 6:35 pm |

dave

Thank you Mr. Hitler. Steven Cobert is not Jewish. The Jews do not "own everything". They just control the banks and Hollywood.

November 11, 2012 at 6:43 pm |

Chad

The public rise of agnosticism, atheism, and secularism led to aggressive mockery as a form of persuasion

This is actually a really interesting statement on many levels.
– why do atheists use mockery so much?
– why do they feel it is persuasive?

A mockery is something said about someone or something to make that person or thing look bad. Sometimes, friends do this in fun and this is good. But most of the time when someone is mocking someone else, it is because they do not like that person. A mockery usually is not true.

I would have to agree, mockery is really a position that a person is forced to retreat to when they really have nothing intelligent to say and simply can not marshal an argument.

Mocking is a form of the fallacy known as "ad hominem"ad hominem short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent, instead of against the opponent's argument.[1] Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as an informal fallacy,[2][3][4] more precisely an irrelevance.[5]

This is widely understood.. so, why can't atheists come up with a good, fact based, organized, refutation of the Christian claim?

November 11, 2012 at 6:35 pm |

Answer

Poor baby needs attention. 😛

November 11, 2012 at 6:38 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

They don't have to. The burden of proof, as you've been told before, is on the one who claims something exists, not the one who sees no evidence that it does. You've been here for a long time, Chard. Why haven't you figured out that your posts are ineffective? That you aren't able to provide evidence for the existence of a god? That what you have is faith, not facts?

I suspect it's because you have an enormous ego.

November 11, 2012 at 6:39 pm |

MagicPanties

Because the burden of proof is on the christians, and thus far they have provided no proof.
Atheists do not have to prove god does not exist, it is the other way round.

I, for example, can claim that my invisible pink unicorn created the universe.
You cannot prove that my unicorn does not exist; therefore [using your logic] it does and so my claim has merit.

November 11, 2012 at 6:39 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

By the way, Chard, what do you think most of your posts consist of? Do you really think all your little "LOLs" and smirkey emoticons are anything but ad hominem?

November 11, 2012 at 6:40 pm |

Colin

We have. You just ignore it. Let's start with your belief in the mythology of the "empty tomb". You base your entire doctrine on the belief that a man rose from the dead. Your belief in this is due entirely to the writings of the early Christian authors all of whom had a religious agenda and wrote years after the death of Jesus. Analysed objectively and like any other historical claim, the chances of thos stories being true are vanshingly small.

November 11, 2012 at 6:40 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

So Chard is following his usual modus operandi: he's abandoned one argument he can't win for another in his little Rolodex of topics.

November 11, 2012 at 6:42 pm |

Answer

Imagine a sealed can without a label.

You – "I believe it is a can of beans."

Other religious twits – "It's a can of tomatoes."

An atheist – We invent the can opener for that purpose. Evidence.

November 11, 2012 at 6:42 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

Chad et al,

Any religion based on monotheism may well be exponentially conjured if one but understands that Nothingness itself has a 'play' in the eventual formations of the 'elementals' of quantum particle physics or as I see it, the Gods of the infinitesimally finite. These sub atomic granules of living matter cannot be destroyed but only made to be energetically raised to a hgher degree of quantum physicality. Living are all quantum structures and they always will be no matter what science or slow learners of scientific phenomena consider being 'non' life.

November 11, 2012 at 6:57 pm |

Chad

@Answer "An atheist – We invent the can opener for that purpose. Evidence."
=>except,, you dont do that.. right? that was the point that the author was making. Mockery is not evidence.

=======
@Colin "We have. You just ignore it."
@Chad "you have? where?

@Colin "Let's start with your belief in the mythology of the "empty tomb". You base your entire doctrine on the belief that a man rose from the dead. Your belief in this is due entirely to the writings of the early Christian authors all of whom had a religious agenda and wrote years after the death of Jesus. Analysed objectively and like any other historical claim, the chances of thos stories being true are vanshingly small."
@Chad "where is this objective analysis? can you please provide a pointer to it?

no serious historian challenges the historicity of these facts:
– Jesus’ burial
– the discovery of his empty tomb
– his post-mortem appearances
– the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection.

How do you explain those accepted historical facts?

November 11, 2012 at 7:04 pm |

Bob

None of what you posted, except maye his death, are accepted historical facts. Even that has no extra-biblical support.

November 11, 2012 at 7:08 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

Really, Chard, there's no proof any of the reasons you posted are factual.

November 11, 2012 at 7:14 pm |

Answer

@Chad

You love to skip over these two things about yourself.

6. the world is full of people with mistaken belief systems
7. where in the world are you getting this erroneous information from?

==Do try to correct your own ignorance.

November 11, 2012 at 7:16 pm |

Chad

In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (who is a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285

Robert M. Price (an atheist who denies existence) agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 028106329X page 61

Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Michael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200

Robert E. Van Voorst states that biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted. Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 page 16

ames D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in Sacrifice and Redemption edited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460X pages 35–36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"

Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774

November 11, 2012 at 7:47 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

And not a single one of them can state categorically that Jesus was divine, Chard.

November 11, 2012 at 7:49 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

Come at me with one of your smirks, Chard. I can't wait.

November 11, 2012 at 7:51 pm |

Answer

So chad you have about 5 references that support your delusion. Now go and find 5 that refutes them.

Will you be willing to do the research against what you believe and why not? XD

November 11, 2012 at 7:53 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

*crickets chirping as Chard digests the plethora of sources that refute his claims.

November 11, 2012 at 8:06 pm |

mama k

Since we're talking "fives", you may want to revisit the five points supporting your case for creation that you were not able to prove in this thread, Chad:

Like all religious people they want material sources that only validate their inherent position. The label we call a "bubble".

Music has to be screened and labelled as such. Almost every indulgence must be sifted through the lens of "being acceptable for christian consumption." Such a sordid lot of repressed idiots these 'christians'...

November 11, 2012 at 8:13 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

And the countdown now begins. How long will it take before The Vegetable resurfaces to argue a different point? You can bet he is now thumbing through that Rolodex of topics. He'll light on one that hasn't been discussed recently and pull the same stupid crap as he did here.

November 11, 2012 at 8:20 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Other One

Chad wrote "Why can't atheists come up with a good, fact based, organized, refutation of the Christian claim?"

Well, it's a bit like taking on a tissue paper castle. When you go about it you find that it's already fallen under its own weight. Yes, Jesus existed about as certainly as Socrates existed. He died – no surprises there. But Christians say he rose into life again and lives now. Understandably there are no living witnesses of the resurrection, so we can suspend judgement on that, but there are no witnesses of his continued existence. I think we need support of that part of the claim before the rest can be believed.

November 11, 2012 at 8:24 pm |

UncleBenny

In the early sixteenth century, Pope Leo X is on record as declaring: "It has served us well, this myth of Christ."

@Atheist "Well, it's a bit like taking on a tissue paper castle. When you go about it you find that it's already fallen under its own weight."
@Chad "you cant produce an argument debunking Christianity, because it's to easy? it's already self refuting?
LOL

that has to be the single most illogical statement I believe I have ever heard..
man: "why cant you move that 500lb weight off the floor?"
bodybuilder "because the minute I touch it, it floats up into the air"
man: "ah.. hmm.. then, you can easily move it off the floor.. right? I can easily move a balloon.. it's simple"
bodybuilder "perhaps I need to rethink my statement..."

=====
@Atheist "But Christians say he rose into life again and lives now. Understandably there are no living witnesses of the resurrection, so we can suspend judgement on that"
@Chad "ah.. so you deny the ability of the historian to understand anything about what happened in the past. Ok, as long as your are honest about your historical methodology "nothing can ever be known" lol"

=====
@Atheist " but there are no witnesses of his continued existence. I think we need support of that part of the claim before the rest can be believed."
@Chad "????
only 2.2 billion... what number were you looking for?

@Answer "Will you be willing to do the research against what you believe and why not?"
@Chad "sure, do you know of any? 🙂

====
@mama k "Since we're talking "fives", you may want to revisit the five points supporting your case for creation that you were not able to prove in this thread, Chad"
@Chad "I certainly presented evidence in support of those points. That evidence was not refuted in any way shape or form.
In fact, if you take these typical atheist responses off the table:
– "that's all nonsense"
– "we dont know"
– "God does not exist"

they werent even addressed.. right? (with the one caveat that @Concerned Citizen was trying to build a case based on two recent movies that Judas was a vampire.. which of course didnt address any of the 5 points)?

November 12, 2012 at 10:18 am |

mama k

Chad:

1. As Tom, Tom alluded, Chad, you still don't have anything proving any "divineness" about Jesus. And I would go on to say you don't have anything proving higher being, or contact with such, period.

2. [Chad:] " That evidence was not refuted " [regarding: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/29/my-take-god-not-in-whirlwinds-of-sandy-presidential-race/comment-page-21/#comment-1905772 ]
Well Chad that's because it was clearly not credible evidence. You were called on that and you never responded. So it doesn't even matter what kind of response was give to your claim of evidence, Chad, because your five points are not credible evidence.

3. [also regarding the sandy-presidential-race link above] Concerned Citizen did build a case that you evidently were not able to challenge. Others not buying the silly evidence to your five points of little consequence. Of course that should be plain to anyone, being that, as you, fled the scene so to speak.

November 12, 2012 at 2:11 pm |

mama k

My last part of my last post needs to be cleaned up a bit:

So it doesn't even matter what kind of response was given to your claim of evidence, Chad, because your five points are not credible evidence.

3. [also regarding the sandy-presidential-race link above] Concerned Citizen did build a case that you evidently were not able to challenge. Others not buying the silly evidence (your five points) are of of little consequence. Of course that should be evident to anyone, being that you fled the scene, so to speak.

November 12, 2012 at 2:48 pm |

mama k

And again, this was not clear: "Others not buying the silly evidence (your five points) are of of little consequence" What I mean is: "Others are not buying your evidence (the five points) as such, and therefore it is of little consequence."

November 12, 2012 at 2:51 pm |

Chad

@mama k "As Tom, Tom alluded, Chad, you still don't have anything proving any "divineness" about Jesus. And I would go on to say you don't have anything proving higher being, or contact with such, period."
@Chad " those 5 points are statements of fact, the contention regarding those 5 points is that the best explanation of them is the God of Israel.
You have not challenged those 5 statements of fact, nor have you challenged that God is the best explanation of those facts (again, "no they arent" is not a refutation).

You have simply not presented any coherent argument at all.

=====
@mama k "That evidence was not refuted " [regarding: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/29/my-take-god-not-in-whirlwinds-of-sandy-presidential-race/comment-page-21/#comment-1905772 ]
Well Chad that's because it was clearly not credible evidence. You were called on that and you never responded. So it doesn't even matter what kind of response was give to your claim of evidence, Chad, because your five points are not credible evidence."
@Chad "A. As I already said, simply saying "no it isnt" is not a refutation by any standard
B. If in fact what I am presenting is not credible, it should be extremely easy for you to refute it using evidence. The fact doing so seems to be extraordinarily difficult for you, does say something about the nature of the evidence I am presenting.
Right?

======
@mama k " [also regarding the sandy-presidential-race link above] Concerned Citizen did build a case that you evidently were not able to challenge."
@Chad "true, I did not consider his assertion that Judas was a vampire serious. Notwithstanding his "evidence" for such, namely two movies.. lol

=====
@mama k "Others not buying the silly evidence to your five points of little consequence. Of course that should be plain to anyone, being that, as you, fled the scene so to speak."
@chad ""fled the scene? lol

if you arent accusing me of "always trying to get the last word in" you are accusing me of "fleeing the scene"

inconsistent arguments.. both nonsense.

November 12, 2012 at 2:54 pm |

mama k

Chad: "Notwithstanding his "evidence" for such, namely two movies.. lol"

Well see Chad that very well may have been the point of his argument – that rehashed iron-age myth is also something that should not be taken seriously. It is just as real in terms of something that is a story laid down on some kind of media. The only thing religion has, in addition, going for it is that stories were told from generation to generation. But each level we go further in the past, the less likely something is credible – you certainly must know that things relayed by word of mouth more and more gets changed. Also, the further we go back, the more likely we run into things that man would understand today that in ancient times he was afraid of. One thing we also know, is that the nature of man to hoodwink his fellow man has been around since the beginning. So there are many reasons we should not trust things that have only come from ancient writings and word of mouth. One thing that makes it a little obvious as a ruse is that the stories and character shifted – more so the further you go back. Lastly , Chad, even amongst believers you will find those that refute Christ and point to obvious disagreement to prove their case between the OT and the NT. None of it is trustworthy.

November 12, 2012 at 3:24 pm |

mama k

and aside from something being changed that was passed through the generations via word of mouth, Chad, one shouldn't even believe the person standing next to you if they told you they saw a ghost and just assume it was real. Sure you can't prove that person didn't see a ghost, but you just need some kind of proof to give it credibility before passing it on to someone else, otherwise you risk mass-misinformation because of carelessness, panic, etc. There are plenty of things that have explained what people think they see that don't seem to make sense at the time.

November 12, 2012 at 3:54 pm |

Chad

@mama k "Well see Chad that very well may have been the point of his argument – that rehashed iron-age myth is also something that should not be taken seriously".
@Chad "you would have to demonstrate that it had no basis in fact, and that it was simply a rehashed myth.
Hint: saying "it is just a rehashed iron-age myth" isnt a demonstration....

====
@mama k "It is just as real in terms of something that is a story laid down on some kind of media. The only thing religion has, in addition, going for it is that stories were told from generation to generation."
@chad " you have to do better than just saying "they are just stories". Using your standard of refutation with respect to historical events, I can claim the exact same about Caesar or Alexander the Great.
Data..
you have to present data, not just generic "no, that is not true"..

it is only at AU (Atheist University), that "NO, that isnt true" is actually considered a completely devastating refutation of an opponents position. I think they are actually very surprised to find out the rest of the world doesnt consider it so...

======
@mama k "But each level we go further in the past, the less likely something is credible – you certainly must know that things relayed by word of mouth more and more gets changed"
@Chad "see above about general statements with no data backing them up..."

=====
@mama k "Also, the further we go back, the more likely we run into things that man would understand today that in ancient times he was afraid of."
@Chad "see above about general statements with no data backing them up..."

======
@mama k "One thing we also know, is that the nature of man to hoodwink his fellow man has been around since the beginning. So there are many reasons we should not trust things that have only come from ancient writings and word of mouth."
@Chad "see above about general statements with no data backing them up..."

=====
@mama k "One thing that makes it a little obvious as a ruse is that the stories and character shifted – more so the further you go back."
@Chad "see above about general statements with no data backing them up..."

=======
@mama kl " even amongst believers you will find those that refute Christ and point to obvious disagreement to prove their case between the OT and the NT. None of it is trustworthy."
@chad "1.If you dont beleive in the divinity of Jesus, you arent Christian. That's the definition.
2. please provide evidence of disagreement between OT and NT
3. see above about general statements with no data backing them up..."

where's your data?

November 12, 2012 at 3:54 pm |

mama k

Again, Chad as I said on the other page, It is not up to me. The assertions of the bible about a divine being have never put forth any credible proof of such. Therefore it is much more reasonable to assume the higher likelihood that such stories involving an interface with a higher being is myth and most likely involved attributes that have proven consistent over time like politics and survival all among more likely characters – all humans. As I said there I don't actually have to refute nor prove anything to see the obvious – that the bible has not made any reasonable case for its claim from the start.

November 12, 2012 at 5:18 pm |

I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

@Chad,

this statement is nonsense:

"no serious historian challenges the historicity of these facts:
– Jesus’ burial
– the discovery of his empty tomb
– his post-mortem appearances
– the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection."

Serious historians do not debate that someone named Jesus probably lived. There's nothing improbable with the idea that he was also crucified. The resurrection is an entirely different prospect.

November 12, 2012 at 5:30 pm |

Chad

@GOPer "this statement is nonsense::
"no serious historian challenges the historicity of these facts:
– Jesus’ burial
– the discovery of his empty tomb
– his post-mortem appearances
– the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection."
Serious historians do not debate that someone named Jesus probably lived. There's nothing improbable with the idea that he was also crucified. The resurrection is an entirely different prospect."

@Chad "you arent paying attention.. 🙂

None of those facts require the supernatural to accept as historical, which is why they are nearly universally accepted by serious historians (atheist/agnostic as well).

The resurrection is the best explanation of those 4 facts, that is supernatural.

Other explanations have been put forth to explain those facts, namely:
– the "hallucination" hypothesis
– the "disciples stole the body" hypothesis
– the "jesus had a twin brother" hypothesis
– the "swoon" hypothesis
– the "mistaken tomb" hypothesis

all of which have been refuted at this point. The question remains: "how do you explain those facts?"

November 12, 2012 at 6:45 pm |

I'm not a GOPer, nor do I play one on TV

@Chad,

I don't believe in the 'discovery' of his empty tomb, plus your (Gospel) sources are notoriously inconsistent here. You would think this is the "one" thing they would get right – were it actually true.

"his post-mortem appearances" says who? The apostles and the other hangers on like Mary? Who else?

"the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection."
Ummmm ... they made it up?

I will grant you that, were Jesus to have resurrected, this would be good evidence of his divinity. We don't see a lot of resurrections of the dead. I don't buy into any of what you call 'evidence' of the resurrection. You have faith and I respect that. It is not proof.

November 12, 2012 at 6:55 pm |

MCR

@Chad, "no serious historian challenges the historicity of these facts"

Actually, no serious historian without an axe to grind even discusses these "facts" because anyone with an ounce of scientific integrity knows there's not enough information to go on to meet even the most basic standards for proof of anything but the fact that there were a few prophets around at the time and and some executions which may or may not have matched up against the lives of the known prophets. If you think there's anything resembling proof, for or against any more than that, you've been swallowing some seriously biased writings. There's just not the kind of proof out there you seem to think there is, and that's why serious historians don't even publish on this subject.

November 12, 2012 at 7:03 pm |

Moby Schtick

Oh, there were a good hundred to two hundred "Yeshuas" runnin' 'round Jerusalem claiming to be the messiah and "working miracles" in the few decades around the turn of the millennium. And 'miracles" were evidently commonplace to read the writings from that era about all sorts of "prophets" and whatnot. Even writings in the NT talk about miracles that occur from some other source than god or christianity and claims that "false prophets" do miracles to deceive believers.

@GOPer "I don't believe in the 'discovery' of his empty tomb"
@Chad "do you mean Jesus wasnt buried in a tomb, or that his body remained in the tomb in which He was buried?
– if the former, you place yourself in direct opposition to the vast majority of historical scholarship (agnostic, atheistic, classicist, believer) who view the burial of Jesus one of the most solidly attested aspects of the passion narrative.
– if the latter, you then have to propose a way that the Christian belief based on the physical resurrection of Jesus could have survived in the face of an occupied tomb.

=====
@GOPer "plus your (Gospel) sources are notoriously inconsistent here.
@Chad "just a reminder, these two statements are not contradictory:
-Fred and Alice went to the store
-Alice went to the store

these two are contradictory:
-Fred and Alice went to the store
-Alice went to the store, Fred did not

You should read the Gospel accounts with this new understanding..

=======
@GOPer "You would think this is the "one" thing they would get right – were it actually true."
@Chad "ah.. you havent read the Gospel accounts and arent aware of the differences.. Now I get it..

I wonder if you could actually name a single difference, without google of course 🙂

=======
@GOPer "his post-mortem appearances" says who? The apostles and the other hangers on like Mary? Who else?
@Chad "he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. 1 Corinthians 15

======
@GOPer ""the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection." Ummmm ... they made it up?"
@Chad "the 'Legendary" hypothesis.. thoroughly debunked because:
– it cant explain why the apostles would be willing to go to their death proclaiming the truth that they had witnessed a physically resurrected Jesus
– it cant explain the empty tomb

=====
@GOPer "I don't buy into any of what you call 'evidence' of the resurrection."
@Chad "in the end, you are probably better just sticking with a superficial "that's all nonsense" response, The problem with attempting to actually deal with the evidence in an historically logical manner, is that you quickly see why after over 300 years of earnestly trying, no one has ever posited a naturalistic explanation of the accepted facts.

To this day, the resurrection remains the only viable live option.

November 12, 2012 at 10:04 pm |

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

What do you do for a living, Chad? Just curious.

November 12, 2012 at 10:09 pm |

Chad

@Moby "Oh, there were a good hundred to two hundred "Yeshuas" runnin' 'round Jerusalem claiming to be the messiah and "working miracles" in the few decades around the turn of the millennium."
@Chad "very true,Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings! 30 The God of our ancestors raised Jesus from the dead—whom you killed by hanging him on a cross. 31 God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins. 32 We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”

33 When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. 34 But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. 35 Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: “Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. 36 Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. 37 After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. 38 Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39 But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.” acts 5

good advice dont you think?

November 12, 2012 at 10:09 pm |

Chad

@MCR ".. serious historians don't even publish on this subject.

=>bizarre...
Especially since Jesus is a subject of historical scrutiny is irrefutably the most popular subject in the history of the world.

November 12, 2012 at 10:13 pm |

Chad

It's getting late.. should have read "Especially since Jesus receives more historical scrutiny than any other person in the history of the world."

November 12, 2012 at 10:43 pm |

Blasphemy

Deuteronomy 13:6 says you better stay away from your family when you preach. They may not accept your God as their God.

If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death.

November 11, 2012 at 6:35 pm |

Christopher Walken

A joke, if I may. What, is the difference, between Jesus, and a picture of Jesus? Well, I will tell you, you only need one nail, to hang up a picture of Jesus. I hope you got that. To me, just, funny.

November 11, 2012 at 6:34 pm |

dave

Christopher – Eraserhead called, he wants his hair back

November 11, 2012 at 6:45 pm |

Jon

Ever hear the one about Jesus being a non-existent myth? It's a good one.

November 11, 2012 at 6:24 pm |

Roman Stage Hand

"Take the crosses off 'em, we don't want the lions to choke!"

November 11, 2012 at 6:28 pm |

anonymous

hiyooooooooooooooo

November 11, 2012 at 6:31 pm |

AlphaMaryYankee

Ya'ever hear the one about a man named Jesus who came from Nazareth? Text from other religions verify his existence. He was a real person. You might want to read the gospels of Mary Magdalene (his female companion), Judas and Thomas. They're found in the Nag Hammadi Library online. These are the gospels that the Nicene group leaders quashed. It pretty much says that "god" is within each of us. The power, energy and knowledge is in each of us. There is no omnipresent power. Nature is the power. These tenets were hidden because the leaders didn't want individuals to realize their own power and potential to better themselves. The religious hierarchy wanted the masses to be dependent. I don't believe that god exists. I do, however, believe that there is truth in the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. There is power and there is enlightenment as to an individuals' potential on this Earth and in this realm. He was a real guy.

November 11, 2012 at 6:33 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

Look at the teachings of Jesus in the Gnostic literature that relates to being reborn as a Snake, a Lizard, and a Spider. Why did Jesus feel he was reincarnated; and why these animals and insects? That is easy if you read the Gospel of Mary.

Mary had many pet names for her lover and among them were Snake, Lizard, and Spider. Snake and Lizard I can understand, but the passages relative to Spider are less clear. 😉

Love Lettuce,
Love Let us,
GOD.

November 11, 2012 at 6:22 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

Please do consider John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world"

If as Christ is said to have mentioned such then, "Why would Christ ever again want to come back to this world when He in fact has a Kingdom of His own to rule over?"

November 11, 2012 at 6:16 pm |

Eliminate hinduism, Atheism, Secular ism. way of animals, not human.

From book of hindu Mithra ism, savior ism, called bible, handy work of hindu magi's, criminal tricksters.

November 11, 2012 at 6:19 pm |

HeavenSense

The special today is Roast Beef and Provolone. Add fresh avocado for $2 extra. Includes one side.

November 11, 2012 at 6:30 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

Hello "E"!

Mithra ism? Could you tell me more about Mithra ism?

November 11, 2012 at 6:31 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

Generic Pop-Tarts 6 fer a buck. Eat two daily. Saves money that way.

November 11, 2012 at 6:33 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

"E",

My ideology of Life stands upon my view that all things are sacred and should be treasured. Mankind seems stretched in our humanism ideals with little leveraging of saddled brevities. Archaic shadows toward .otherly religions seem to weigh mightily upon the base rooted deists of our Age

One more time for those who continue to "thum-p" John's gospel passagess:

Actually, all of John's Gospel is of questionable historic value.

To wit:

From Professor Bruce Chilton in his book, Rabbi Jesus,

"Conventionally, scholarship has accorded priority to the first three gospels in historical work on Jesus, putting progressively less credence in works of late date. John's Gospel for example is routinely dismissed as a source......

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John#Authorship

"Since "the higher criticism" of the 19th century, some historians have largely rejected the gospel of John as a reliable source of information about the historical Jesus.[3][4] "[M]ost commentators regard the work as anonymous,"[5] and date it to 90-100."

"The authorship has been disputed since at least the second century, with mainstream Christianity believing that the author is John the Apostle, son of Zebedee. Modern experts usually consider the author to be an unknown non-eyewitness, though many apologetic Christian scholars still hold to the conservative Johannine view that ascribes authorship to John the Apostle."

And from Professor Gerd Ludemann, in his book, Jesus After 2000 Years, p. 416,

"Anyone looking for the historical Jesus will not find him in the Gospel of John. "

See also http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/john.html

November 11, 2012 at 6:44 pm |

God's Oldest Dreamer

Reality,

Just because there is a discretion regarding the Gospel of John, your wisdomic accolades are themselves based upon the opionated undulations of someone other then yourself. I find such predictions to be mooted due the numbers of backers behind such loosely allocated ingrams of little bearings and or weightiness.

November 11, 2012 at 7:16 pm |

Blasphemy

Our evolutionary compulsion is to triumph, even if it means being totally, illogically, proudly wrong.

And that is the foundation of the religious mind. When asked to prove that the world is flat they will rebut by asking you to prove that God does not exist.

November 11, 2012 at 6:15 pm |

Answer

Well you can see that they love the word "not".

The word itself is a denial.

November 11, 2012 at 6:17 pm |

Eliminate hinduism, Atheism, Secular ism. way of animals, not human.

Word was miss translated, word meant, stretched or spread. Some one did a mistake long time ago and no one corrected it.

November 11, 2012 at 6:22 pm |

Joe Taxpayer

I find it vulgar to joke about certain religious topics – making Jesus jokes is one of them. Jokes have a place in society, but there is a fine line that gets crossed very often. I have a funny side, but I know when it is not appropriate to joke about something.

November 11, 2012 at 6:12 pm |

Meatwad

I like Jesus. He cares for bunnies just like I do. Also his beard is soft. I wish he would come back to the Earth so I could offer him one of my tacos.

November 11, 2012 at 6:19 pm |

Blasphemy

After the resurrection Jesus wanted to show Peter that he "still had it."

So he started walking across the water, About half way he foundered and sank.

After he struggled back to shore Peter slapped him the back and said: " don;t feel bad." "The last time you did not have holes in your feet."

November 11, 2012 at 6:23 pm |

Stan

Joe, you don't have the right to not be offended.

November 11, 2012 at 8:14 pm |

MCR

Really, any Jesus joke? My aunt's a nun and her whole convent tells these jokes. I guess it depends on the speaker, the audience and the joke, but if you never, ever find a Jesus joke funny, you probably are mistaken in thinking you have a sense of humor.

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.